Escobar 2010 Preserv CLIL TED

8/13/2019 Escobar 2010 Preserv CLIL TED

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/escobar-2010-preserv-clil-ted 1/31

Escobar Urmeneta, C. (2010). Pre-service CLIL Teacher-Education in

Catalonia: Expert and novice practitioners teaching and reflecting together

In: David Lasagabaster & Yolanda Ruiz de Zarobe CLIL in Spain:

Implementation, Results and Teacher Training. Newcastle, UK:

Cambridge Scholars Publishing: 189-218. [FORTHCOMING].

CHAPTER TEN

PRE-SERVICE CLIL TEACHER-EDUCATION

IN CATALONIA:

EXPERT AND

NOVICE

PRACTITIONERS

TEACHING AND REFLECTING TOGETHER

CRISTINA ESCOBAR URMENETA

Introduction

This paper aims to present the model of pre-service Teacher-Education

for Content and Language Integrated Learning (TED for CLIL, hereafter)

developed at the Bellaterra Campus of the Universitat Autònoma de

Barcelona (UAB)1 over the last four years. This model is the result of an

on-going process of design, experimentation and discussion among all

stakeholders: student-teachers, school mentors, university tutors and

researchers. The TED for CLIL Component aims at endowing student-

teachers (STs, hereafter) with the basic skills needed for subject-matter

teaching, while simultaneously developing collaboration strategies betweenEnglish teachers and content-subject teachers (i.e. Teachers of Science,

History, etc.) for the development and implementation of CLIL in inclusive

classrooms.

Section one of this chapter presents the national and specific

sociolinguistic and educational contexts in which the course has been

created. Section two outlines the type of collaborative research through

university-school partnership projects that has served as a breeding ground

for the model. Section three puts forward the theoretical foundations that

sustain the proposal. Section four presents the resulting TED for CLIL

Component together with data that illustrate and support the claims made

and final decisions made as a consequence of the on-going process of



experimentation and discussion. Finally, section five summarizes the main

conclusions drawn from the whole process and sketches out areas for

further study.

Context

In Catalonia teachers exercise their profession in its completely

bilingualised school system, where English is steadily gaining ground as

the third language of instruction. A very large proportion of all education

implemented in Catalonia is technically considered as CLIL, due to the

fact that immersion in the minority language (Catalan) has been one of the

major features characterising the Catalan education system since theeighties (Pérez-Vidal, 2001). Nonetheless, in this chapter, second language

immersion will be left aside and the term CLIL will be used exclusively to

refer to education through a foreign language of international use.

Until 2009 the requirements for accessing the teaching profession in

Spain limited to the possession of a four-year university degree in one

single area of specialization plus the completion of a two-month part-time

Mickey Mouse teacher training course called CAP2. Nonetheless, in the

last ten years some universities have been offering optional one-year TED

master courses inspired in curricula produced by the state3. One of them is

the 60 ECTS Master Course run since 1998 by the UAB at its Bellaterra

Campus which offered courses in the branches of Science, Mathematics,

Social Sciences, Catalan, Spanish and English as a Foreign Language

(EFL). The course is organized into four modules: 1. Psycho-Socio-

Pedagogy; 2. Subject-Specific Pedagogy4; 3. Practicum; and 4. Master

Dissertation.

It is within this context that a team of university teachers specialized in

the teaching of English, Science, Social Sciences and Mathematics, in

collaboration with School Mentors in the aforementioned branches

developed a set of TED activities and strategies, the distinctive aim of

which is to develop awareness of the specific challenges that CLIL

programmes pose for teachers and learners, and to equip STs with the

basic skills for competent teaching in those contexts.

Collaborative research in TED for CLIL

For many years, the Practicum has been at the heart of all teacher

education at Bellaterra (Anton and Oller, 2007; González et al., 2008;

Milian and Ribas, 2009; Nussbaum, 2008; Sanmarti, 2007) and its Faculty

of Education runs numerous collaborative projects with Professional



Chapter Ten

Development Schools (PDS hereafter)5. The role that PDS were to play in

the process of design and piloting of the Component is well described by

Edwards et al. (2009:5):

Professional Development School is conceived as a site where initial

teacher education, professional development of teachers, improvement of

teaching and learning and educational research are integrated.

Within this framework, university tutors and school mentors followed

their own action-oriented research programme on CLIL and on Pre-service

TED for CLIL. The procedure followed the standard cycles of action-

research (Carr and Kemmis 1986; Strickland, 1988), namely, drafting a

plan for TED for CLIL, implementing it, gathering and analyzingqualitative data during the experimentation, drawing conclusions and

amending the initial plan, at which point the cycle starts again.

The succession of cycles of action and reflection, as will be stated

later, is the main pedagogical option in our model of TED for CLIL.

Therefore, the introspective approach followed by mentors and tutors

mirrors the inquiry approach followed by STs in their learning-to-teach

process. The quote “ In PDS, schools’ novice teachers learn to teach,

university and school teaching staff investigate questions of teaching and

learning together …” (Edwards et al., 2009:5) captures the essence of theprocess conducted at Bellaterra.

The experimentation of the model carried out with volunteer STs

began in 2006 and it is still an on-going process. In all cases, STs’ level of

competence in English ranged between the Council of Europe’s (COE) B2

and C2. The natural qualitative data gathered throughout the cycles of

experimentation comprises conversational as well as textual or visual data.

Table 10-1 summarizes the variety informants’ data handled during the

process6.

The detailed examination of data seeks to help build up an overallportrait of the outcomes of the experience through a process of

interpretation, where inferences, implications and conclusions are

continually checked against the stakeholders, following the principle of

Authenticity in interpretative research (Guba and Lincoln, 1989). The

variety of informants and data types, together with the process of

continuous triangulation, guarantee that multiple perspectives on the same

events are taken into account and weighed up in the final design of the

CLIL Component, as well as in the other studies that derive from them7.

The data gathered has also allowed for detailed focused studies onparticular issues that have proved key to the success of TED for CLIL.



Some of these studies are quoted in this chapter, the main goal of which is

to provide an overall view of the outcomes of the project.

Table 10-1. Informants and types of data handled.

VENUE / - Event Informants Data

SECONDARY

CLASSROOM:

- CLIL lessons

taught by

experts and

STs.

- Secondary

students.

- Student-

teachers.

- Mentors.

- Observer.

- Audio and/or video

recordings of CLIL

lessons taught by STs.

- Observer’s field notes.

- Documents (drafts,

assignments, tests,

etc.) produced by the

students.

- Photos.

SECONDARY

SCHOOL:

- Mentoring

session.

- Student-

teachers.

- Mentors.


recordings of

mentoring sessions.

- Report Cards.

UNIVERSITY:

- Lessons,

tutorials and

course

evaluation.

- Student-

teachers.

- Tutor.

- Vignette cards.


recordings of lessons

and tutorials.

- Tutor’s field notes

- STs’ reports.ST’S STUDY: - Academic work

required from

the STs.

- Student-

teachers.

- Journal.

- Self-observation

reports (SOR) 1 and 2.

- Master Dissertation.

UNIVERSITY:

- Mentors and

Tutors

meetings.

- Mentors and

tutors.

- Audio recordings of

meetings.

- Field notes.

- Minutes.

SCHOOLS and

UNIVERSITY:

- Interview with

individual

Student-

Teachers and

experts on

content teaching

- Student-

Teachers

- Experts on

content

teaching

- Audio recordings



Chapter Ten

Theoretical Framework

This section briefly presents the main theoretical constructs which haveserved as a framework for the design of TED materials and activities.

Teachers as a Community of Practice

The construct Community of Practice (CoP) directly derives from

Vygotsky’s socio-cultural psychology and Leont'ev's Activity Theory. The

term refers to a number of people who come together in order to achieve

some common goal or project, which binds them together. In the process,

these people come to develop and share ways of doing things and talking;beliefs, values, and a shared repertoire of communal resources (routines,

sensibilities, artefacts, vocabulary, styles, etc.)–in short, practices–as

outcomes of their collective involvement in joint activity, and the

continuous process of negotiation and renegotiation of common meanings.

CoP are learning societies that may change over time depending on the

evolving nature of the common project, may or may not coincide with

established working-groups or organizations; where learning may occur in

formal (i.e. meetings, lessons, etc.) or informal events. People who aspire

to join a CoP (newcomers) are guided by experts (old-timers) in their

process from legitimate peripheral participation (i.e. lending a hand) to full

membership (Grossman et al., 2001; Lave, 1988; Lave and Wenger, 1991;

Rogoff, 1990).

The teaching-staff in a school is a CoP who shares a common goal–

education–, a system of values and a repertoire of experiences, stories,

tools and ways of addressing problems. Teachers meet in official instances

to plan, evaluate and improve teaching actions and teaching tools, and they

also do so in informal settings, over coffee or in the rush of a change of

class. In short, teachers in a school are a group of people who interact and

learn together to improve the quality of their teaching practice.

Within this framework, STs (newcomers), guided by their mentors

(old-timers) are provided with legitimate access to teaching in a process

where they progressively move from peripheral (classroom observation,

helping individual students or small groups) to full participation (planning

and conducting lessons as lead teachers). Professional practices observed,

shared and reflected upon inside and outside the classroom act as a living

curriculum for the apprentice, leading to the development of

knowledgeably skilled identities as qualified teachers.

Additionally, Departments (of mathematics, languages, etc.) are inCatalonia the organizational entities whose common goal is the



satisfactory implementation of the curriculum of any content area within

the school. Teachers who belong to a Department often act as a

community of practice in their own right, with value systems, and ways ofdoing things that are common to practitioners in that given content-area.

Often these practices are in many ways quite different from the practices

legitimized in or by other departments8. CLIL, by proposing the integrated

teaching of more than one school subject in a single setting creates the

opportunity for the development of a new type of CoP, whose members

are about to tackle an innovative enterprise.

The theory-practice gap in dissociated teacher-training models

Research consistently shows that the positivist view on teacher

education– first theory, then practice–results in the progressive substitution

of the innovative theoretical knowledge acquired by STs at university by

the dominant practices in the school. This substitution might be explained

at least by the following reasons:

a) The disdain that academics often show for practical matters and the

resulting theory-practice gap commonly solved in favour of teacher-

centred practices, so familiar to everyone.

b) The adoption by the novice teacher, in order to be accepted by the

community, of the values and long-established ways of doing of

members of the staff who take pride in resisting innovation.

In a nutshell, however advanced and innovative teaching techniques

presented at university might be, these are soon pushed into the background

and consigned to oblivion, whereas transmissive teaching, as always has

been done, is enforced once and again.

Integrative paradigms for Teacher Education

The first solid attempts to bridge the theory-practice gap came in the

sixties with the arrival of microteaching (Allen and Ryan, 1969). Recent

developments in this technique include the use of video-recorded lessons

as a base for discussion, and the investing of the STs with greater status by

assigning them the task of deciding what sort of feedback they want on the

lesson. These later well-tested proposals have been adopted in the design

of our proposal.

Schön (1983, 1987) theorized the Reflection-in-action / Reflection-on-

action model for teacher education, as a means to overcome the prevailing

predominance of theory over practice. Reflection-in-action would allowteachers to carry out on-the-spot thought experiments [i.e.: if I do this, this



Chapter Ten

will happen]. However, its immediacy does not allow for deep reflection

on the why’s and how’s of particular classroom episodes. This requires

time and distance only allowed by Reflection-on-action or thinking backand exploring how and why she acted that way. This effort will result, it is

hypothesized, in the development of a theory of practice which will

become useful in future teaching situations.

Schön’s paradigm has received major support from research and has

been discussed, further developed or adapted into different models (Esteve

and Carandell, 2009; Kortaghen, 2001; Perrenoud, 2004; Shulman, 1987;

Smith, 1994). The common traits that all of these proposals share are: (a)

the attempt to bring theory and practice together; and (b) the fact that

teachers’ or STs’ priorities are taken into account.The design of the Bellaterra integrative model draws from the

Reflective Practitioner paradigm as well as from other congruent teacher

education proposals which advocate that teacher-led inquiry is the key

towards genuine teacher development, such as Experiential Learning

(Kolb, 1984) or Teacher Empowerment (Bolin, 1989; Short, 1992), and

Action Research (Car and Kemmis, 1986; Elliot, 1991; Strickland, 1988).

However, in contrast to other models derived from Schön’s which follow

strict protocols of training activities or emphasise participants’ individual

reflective endeavour, the Bellaterra proposal departs from the idea redolent

of Vygotsky (1978) that Learning does not belong to individual persons,

but to the various conversations of which they are a part (McDermott, in

Murphy, 1999:17). Therefore, in our proposal it is through conversations

with students, peer-STs, mentors and tutors on CLIL experiences that STs

engage in deep intense reflection in and on teaching and learning. Access

to relevant literature is viewed as a further step in this conversation,

especially valuable once the STs have some background knowledge,

questions and data to bring into their reading. It is hoped that all this will

lead to the emergence of a STs’ own voice as professional educators that

will, in the long term, continue developing throughout their careers, and,

in the short term, crystallize in pieces of individual academic work within

the Master Course, such as the self-observation reports or Master

dissertations.

Summarising, the cornerstones of the designed proposal are the

alternation of cycles of action and reflection triggered by inter-area

(content and foreign language experts) and inter-level (students, peer-STs,

mentors and tutors) conversations, in a double loop of teacher-led enquiry,

as shown in figure 10-1.



Figure 10-1. Double loop of teacher-led inquiry.

The CLIL teacher profile

The syllabi of a vast majority of teacher-training course

the shape of a taxonomy of content –usually quite exte

covered throughout the course. This content is usually

ranked according to theoretical principles agreed upon by

This type of Cartesian organization has the advantage of pr

ground for trainers and trainees, who find themselves

academic environment. However, two main flaws burden t

the one hand, the perpetuation of the theory-practice gapdescribed in section 3.2.; on the other, the tendency

s tend to take

nsive-- to be

rganised and

he Academy.

viding a safe

in a familiar

he model: on

as has beento fall into



Chapter Ten

transmissive teacher-training as the only possible way to cover a packed

syllabus in the assigned time span, which enters into flagrant contradiction

with the teaching models presented during the course. For this reason, thecurriculum in the TED for CLIL Component follows a protocol of cycles

of action and reflection, where occasions for learning and development

occur, thus enacting the principle stated above that the community [formed

in this particular case by peers, Master professors, tutors, mentors and the

rest of the school] acts as a living curriculum for the apprentice. Experts

on the teaching and learning of foreign languages will easily find

resemblances between this organizational structure and the Procedural

(task-based) Syllabuses proposed by Breen (1987a and 1987b), for its

explicit criticism of syllabi composed of taxonomies of target contentpresented to students in Cartesian order (Propositional Syllabuses), and its

radical stance in favour of learner-led syllabi developed in and through

social action.

The fact that we have not developed a thorough list of content to be

covered in a given order does not imply that the work presented to STs is

asystematic or lacking a clear goal. The alternative adopted accepts that in

one year it is not possible to cover all the desirable content. Selection will

made according two main criteria: (a) give priority to issues raised by STs

deriving from their teaching practice; and (b) the formulation of a target

profile for the CLIL teacher, which derives from the analysis of the data

gathered, mainly from the discussions with mentors and STs. This profile

covers four target areas of expertise ( Escobar Urmeneta, 2009) that were

identified as vital for the CLIL teacher9, namely:

1. Subject-specific pedagogical competence in their particular area

of expertise that will allow student-teachers to identify, plan and

implement quality teaching, accepted as that by experts in the

teaching of each particular subject. I.E. quality science education or

quality maths education.

2. Pedagogical-communicative competence so as to manage

efficient academic interaction in CLIL classrooms. This involves a

combination of advanced communicative and pedagogical competences

to articulate academic discourse in adaptive10

ways (Duffy, 1998), so

as to match and strengthen the developing cognitive and

communicative abilities of the students. These include being able to

construct explanations, clarify, frame, give instructions, elicit, provide

feedback, organize, check, discipline, evaluate, encourage, gather and

keep learners’ attention, and the rest of the communicative abilities

which are essential in teaching situations. But also, being able tostructure tasks and use materials and/or teaching strategies which



facilitate and encourage the students’ contributions to the lesson, no

matter how limited their linguistic repertoire might be.

3.

Inter-area collaboration skills: given the high degree ofspecialization of candidates (see first section) and their low degree of

convertibility, collaborative skills and flexibility to discuss, plan and

teach in collaboration with peers from different epistemological

traditions (Science and English, for example) are also indispensable.

4. Professional skills that will allow the initiation of a sustained

process of self-development and innovation through shared reflection

on their own teaching practices.

However, some strategy is needed to avoid the confusion and

insecurity that could derive from an exclusively à la carte curriculum and

guarantee that the course holds the necessary cohesion, and that basic

content need are covered. This is achieved though the cycles of activities

that will be presented in section 4.2. All of them aim at the development of

STs’ skills in the four areas presented above, through an adaptive TED

approach.

TED for CLIL activities and strategies

This section justifies some of the choices made in the design of the

TED for CLIL Component and presents its outcomes.

All the STs in the master, regardless of branch, are offered information

on multilingualism, multilingual education, classroom interaction and the

use of second and foreign languages in academic settings. Also,

workshops are run on academic communication and efficient teacher-

students interaction as part of basic common training11. STs who opt for

the CLIL track also are given access to specialized training.

As mentioned above, the TED for CLIL Component is not a separate

module but a constituent built into the standard curriculum. This trait is

crucial to the feasibility of the Component as other options would not be

viable within an already packed prescriptive Curriculum which does not

make any provision for CLIL. In this arrangement those STs who opt for

the CLIL track merely incorporate the CLIL perspective into a number of

assignments (i.e. planning, implementing and evaluating a teaching

sequence) required from all students, and receive specialized support for

that in the form of tutorials or feedback conferences.



Chapter Ten

Phase 1. Getting started

Phase 1 starts at the end of September and takes up the first sevenweeks of the course. It frames the work that will be carried out throughout

the course. The course goals, activities and main pedagogical options are

presented and discussed. STs also obtain the basic tools to carry out the

assignment that will be set for this phase. TED for CLIL activities and

strategies include classroom observation and preparation for Phase 2.

Getting ready for phase 2

The final week STs are informed they will be observing their mentors

and peers (Lasagabaster and Sierra, 2004). Data gathering techniques and

reflectional instruments (i.e. observation protocol, vignette card, journal

keeping, data management, etc.) are presented and discussed. Oral and

written examples on how to use those instruments are provided.

STs will also be teaching and video-recording their own lessons. The

camera (and the assignment it represents) is an imposition (Greenwalt,

2008:393), as the reactions we get from STs when video-recording is

announced show, ranging from more covert to overt reluctance towards it:

I won’t be able to do it. I don’t have a camera”. “What if the school camerabreaks down?” “What if the school or the students do not allow us to

record?” “I think this is not natural: neither myself, nor the students will

behave naturally in front of the camera”. (Field notes: October 2007 and

2008).

All the expressed fears are explored and dealt with. Strategies that have

proved effective in helping STs gain confidence at this point are:

- Careful explanations of the benefits that will derive from the

experience.- Provision of examples that make clear that there is a solution for

every practical or technical problem they may come across.

- Acknowledgement that a certain level of anxiety over being

filmed is normal, even for very experienced teachers. Only reckless

teachers might not care.

- Insist on the non-judgmental nature of the classroom observation

sessions that will be held.

- Insist it is the STs themselves who will select the fragments to be

shared with the rest of the class. STs can ask for advice, but no onewill interfere with the final decision. The majority of the STs realise

that this has two practical consequences:



o If a ST feels that in one part of one lesson s/he was not

particularly inspired s/he may decide not to choose this

fragment and avoid a potentially face-threateningsituation.

o The more lessons the ST records, the more possibilities

to choose.

- Invite STs from previous years to present their own experience

with the video recordings.

Phase 2. Practicum I

STs spend two weeks of November in their Practicum school and

become familiarized with it. They observe, teach and collect data that will

be fully exploited in phase 3. TED for CLIL activities and strategies

include participant observation, teaching, collecting data and feedback

conferences.

Video-taping lessons

STs are encouraged to start filming lessons as soon as possible so that

the recordings can be used as starting point for the feedback conferences.

A certain level of anxiety in front of the video-recordings is still there

(“nerves, pressure”. ST’s report 2008), but the first viewings of self,

performing the role of teacher, sends the viewer such a different image

from the one they expected, that the utility of recording as a tool for self-

development soon becomes clear and resistance melts away. A common

complaint at this point is not to have recorded some particular lesson they

would have liked to look at and/or share: “Unfortunately we often forgot

to record ourselves and we lost lots of data” (ST’s report 2009). STs often

report practical problems such as tape identification, low quality recordings,

low batteries, etc.

Feedback Conferences

Feedback conferences are key to the proposal. As part of the

collaborative project on mentoring, some of these sessions are also video-

taped and analysed by mentors and tutors. In all cases, after each formal

conference STs fill in a Report Card where the main outcomes of the

conference are recorded. Feedback is also made available in less formal

contexts and ways, for example, over coffee.



Chapter Ten

Mentors comment that after their very first performances STs

sometimes fall into a state of temporary hopelessness, as if they were

mourning the loss of the perfect lesson they had envisaged while planning.Feedback Report cards confirm this point:

The activity , according to my mentor, did not go as badly as I thought.

(…) I learnt that it is often the case that you spend a lot of time and effort

to prepare an activity, which does not interest the students. This may be

disappointing but this does not imply that the activity is wrong as it may be

more successful with another group of students (Source: ST’s Report

Card).

Keeping high demands on the STs plus providing them with technicaland emotional support are the strategies that mentors combine to help

trainees to make progress (see conferences below).

STs reports also show that the aspects prioritized by mentors vary to a

large extent from ST to ST. In the majority of cases, basic survival

teaching skills take up a large proportion of the time that mentors devote

to feedback: the ST’s position in front of the classroom, the quality of

explanations, rhythm, individualized attention to secondary students or

classroom management. At this point, a minority of STs also receive

feedback on activity or materials design. Using ST’s words: “ It wouldhave been a good idea to prepare some comprehension questions to round

up the activity. I’ll prepare them just in case I have time after CLIL

activity two” (Source: ST’s report card).

The previous entry also shows how mentors succeed in attaching a pro-

active purpose to their feedback, which is more focused on how to tackle

one similar problem next day, than on conducting a detailed analysis of the

lesson taught.

In this respect, very specific on-line telegraphic feedback provided

while teaching (for example, while the students proceed with their tasks)has proved to be a very useful strategy, as it gives the ST the possibility to

readdress her teaching strategy on the spot, to observe the results of this

change and to end the lesson with a feeling of success ( Escobar Urmeneta,

Evnitskaya and Horrillo, 2009). Mentors are very aware that STs need to

finish phase 2 with a feeling of global accomplishment and provide the

necessary support so this is so. Face is a major issue throughout the whole

process of feedback, especially when some criticism is needed or when

peers are involved in the provision of feedback. This is consistent with the

findings of Greenwalt (2008).



Phase 3. Looking back and forward

Phase 3 comprises twelve weeks from November to February

dedicated to analysing and reflecting on the experience gained during

Practicum I, and to planning and designing materials for Practicum II. The

work carried out during this period is central to the design of the

Component .

CLIL vignettes

From all the video-taped lessons, STs select three two to five-minute-

long vignettes and for each of the vignettes a Vignette Card is filled in

(figures 10-2 and 10-3), which is handed in to the tutor. One of the

vignettes must correspond to a teacher-led activity, another one to an

activity carried out in small groups, and the third activity is completely

open. Out of them, the tutor will select at least one vignette per ST to be

presented in class. This organization guarantees the analysis of a variety of

teaching situations, which easily leads to discuss an array of practical and

theoretical target issues.

Figure 10-2. First problematic version of item in Vignette Card.

The item “Why I chose this vignette” did not prove to be clear enough

so as to elicit the type of feedback STs expect from peers and tutor (figure

10-2). It is interesting to notice that whereas STs used the sample cards

provided in phase 1 so as to guide themselves in the other rubrics, for 75%

of the cards this did not happen with this last item. Our interpretation is

that, in spite of all the efforts made in phase 1 to present the task as anopportunity for self-development, the STs tackle it as an academic

assignment to be assessed for a mark. Probably, their previous academic

experience is conditioning their perception of the task: the learner is never

in control; the teacher is. Self-directed teacher development needs more

time and action to have a profound effect. As a consequence of this

observation, several improvements were introduced in the Card, as can be

observed in figure 10-3.

The development of STS’ self-confidence can be traced in the fact that

the proportion of STs that chose lessons which show a situation



Chapter Ten

categorised by the presenter as problematic ranges from 25% to 45% of all

vignettes.

Vignette presentation

A large part of the eight weeks in phase 3 are devoted to STs’

presentation and analysis of their teaching experiences. For STs there is a

feeling of pride in showing what they have been able to accomplish in

such a short time. On the other hand, the encouraging utterances and

gestures from peers are frequent during the presentations, and help to build

up the necessary levels of comradeship so as to turn a potentially face-

threatening situation into an enjoyable experience. STs attach a great value

to these sessions, not only for the feedback they receive on their teaching,but also for the possibility to discuss other STs performances: “ I think I

learned a lot from my self-observations, and also from those from my

fellow students when we discussed them during the lessons” (ST’s report,

2008), although they also resent from the difficulties of providing

feedback to their peers: “I felt politically incorrect” (ST’s report, 2009).

During experimentation, several attempts to conduct 100% non-

judgemental discussions were conducted, but the results were poor as too

much emphasis on not judging straitjacketed the discussion. The

alternative format presented here has proved effective to promote

descriptive, articulated explanations.

The point of departure for discussion is the viewing of vignettes. STs

own personal teaching-experience [“experience” is used here as in

“shopping-experience”] shown in the video becomes objectified and

therefore de-emotionalized to a large extent.

The agenda for a two-hour session of this sort consists of four seven-

minute-long consecutive presentations followed by open debate. During

each presentation, the task for STs in the audience is to take notes and

decide on a question to ask each presenter, one remarkable feature

observed in the vignette and one piece of advice that might have

contributed to improving the lesson. In this way, talking about “good ” and

“bad ” teaching [= what I liked or hated in the lesson] is not banned, only

postponed until all the questions asked by the audience have been

answered. At that point, gut reactions have lost part of their vehemence

and have become more elaborated and much more serene and cautious;

therefore, much more useful for the addressee, but also for the author.



Figure 10-3. Full Vignette Card. Redrafted version.



Chapter Ten

Sessions are usually lively, and the degree of involvement on the part

of all the students is very high. As expected, a variety of issues emerge

from the vignettes: some of them vary greatly from edition to editionwhereas others remain constant. Some are raised by the ST in charge of

the presentation, but many others that go unnoticed by the presenters are

brought up by their peers or tutor.

The role of the tutor at this point is to help STs make progress from

intuitions and unstructured ideas to more structured ones; to highlight

contradictions, prejudices and clichés and to draw attention to important

details that have gone unnoticed and may well explain one particular

event12

. Technical terms are offered when needed, theoretical issues are

introduced if relevant to the argument and relevant readings,recommended. As sessions go on, discussions progressively grow more

focused and informed and the tutor becomes more demanding.

Figure 10-4. Source: Kolb (1984: 219).

Kolb’s (1984) model of Experiential Learning in figure 10-4 accounts

for the way in which practice, reflection and theory building relate to one

another throughout this period (circled arrow) and explains how the model

attempts to overcome the gap between theory and practice.

The scrutiny of field-notes shows which theoretical issues have

emerged in vignette presentations in two or more editions: code-switching,interaction vs. speaking, IRF13 sequences of teacher-class interaction,

comprehensible input, negotiation of meaning, scaffolding, self/other



repair, teacher’s waiting-time, elicitation techniques, authentic/display

questions, student-student interaction, cooperative work, learner on-

task/off-task, or teacher assertiveness. Some of the issues that emergedfrom the presentations in only one edition are: learners’ attention-span,

focus-on-form, computer-mediated communication, pre-reading activities,

task-based learning, class-alert, problem-solving learning, lesson openings

and closings and portfolio assessment. In all cases, the emergence of these

issues takes place in the form of quite unfocused, impressionistic

comments coming from the STs, an occasion which is taken advantage of

by the tutor for a formal presentation of the concept, either to gain a better

understanding of the sequence being presented, or to elicit ideas for

possible future improvement in similar circumstances. Issues such as code-

switching, teacher-class interaction, scaffolding and repair tend to appear

repeatedly throughout the sessions, which allows for progressive depth in

the treatment of the concepts and the assignment of relevant readings.

Problems related to classroom management are always there. These,

together with the pervasive complaint about “the students’ lack of

motivation”, may hinder more in-depth understanding about what is going

on in the classroom. It is the job of the tutor to help STs notice the

observable clues that may assist understanding the students’ possible low

degree of investment in the lesson.

The discussion ends with the identification of one particular area for

further analysis for each ST, which will result in an academic paper

labelled Self-Observation Report 1 (SOR1) to be handed in before Phase 3

ends.

Planning for CLIL

Vignette presentation discussions run parallel with other sessions

devoted to the planning of a CLIL teaching sequence to be implemented in

Phase 4. Planning is a very challenging task for novice teachers, and it waspredicted that CLIL would add extra difficulties, which would demand

extra support from mentors and tutor and careful monitoring. This needs

analysis led to lessons at university which devoted more time to examining

ways of scaffolding learning tasks and providing support for comprehension

and production, as well as to materials analysis and adaptation. STs were

also encouraged to pay weekly visits to their practicum schools and make

appointments with the subject mentor and the English mentor to obtain

feedback on the feasibility and adequacy of the proposal in process.

Although far from being smooth, discussions involving experts on language



Chapter Ten

and content produced complementary and convergent advice highly valued

by trainees.

Nevertheless, it turned out that the difficulties were much higher thanforeseen: students seemed to be unable to cope with so many requirements

at a time and the process of designing CLIL tasks and materials is, when

compared to those students planning standard lessons, slower and full of

obstacles. STs seem to be unable to apply to their planning the

pedagogical principles pertinent to the content-subject, and simultaneously

take into account the communicative constraints that the foreign language

poses for classroom communication. The different drafts STs produce are

underprovided for in one or the other way. STs may feel somewhat

frustrated when, after working hard on a learning task, the feedback theyobtain is that the activity is not within reach because of the high linguistic

demands that the task poses on learners, or because in the process of

simplification the task has lost its main pedagogical qualities. The tandems

of STs with different profiles working together on one common unit might

be a useful strategy to sort out this problem. Due to organizational

constraints this strategy has not yet been implemented.

The Planning for CLIL sessions at university takes advantage of and

recycles the concepts that have been discussed in the Vignette presentation

sessions, and when necessary also present strategies consistent with

learner-centred approaches that may have not appeared in those sessions.

Phase 4. Practicum II

Over seven weeks from February to April, STs, accompanied by their

mentors and peers, take on the responsibilities and duties that correspond

to a normal teacher: planning, teaching, attending meetings, organizing

and attending special events and of-school-grounds activities, etc. They

teach CLIL lessons which are regularly video-taped, as well as standard

lessons. STs are also encouraged to keep a learning log. Activities and

TED strategies include:

Planning for CLIL

Difficulties in planning only begin to melt away when STs are full-

time in their practicum schools, observing first hand the responses their

proposals get from the students. Until this happens, STs do not seem able

to integrate the roughly and finely tuned advice they get from tutors and

mentors. Actual teaching practice helps them to redefine goals, tasks andmaterials, to become more realistic about what can be expected from



students, and to introduce more and more varied support to comprehension

and production. The guiding and supporting role of the mentor has been

essential here, as the possibilities to get lost or frustrated are huge.

Teaching practice

STs quickly gain familiarity in the school milieu and their identities as

teachers in charge begin to emerge, especially when they begin the

implementation of the teaching sequence they have designed. With few

exceptions, mentors also start to view STs as personnel who can provide

help, rather than create extra-work and a more one-to-one relationship

develops, although they report that STs often experience difficulties due to

the accumulation of tasks and their lack of ability to cope with various

obligations at the same time. All the same, STs progressively show higher

levels of self-confidence and a greater ability to organize group activities

which require complex classroom management skills. However, mentors

By the end of phase 4, a common report coming from the STs is that they

are exhausted, but happy. On the whole, STs find this is the most fruitful

and rewarding phase in the course; but also that it is the most demanding

one.

Video-taping lessons

Practical problems of tape identification, low quality recordings, etc.

are always there, but the fear of the camera has by now disappeared in the

vast majority of the cases. The recordings may play an important role in

the formal feedback conferences and will later make up the main source of

data for the STs Master Dissertation.

Feedback conferences

Short, informal feedback conferences are held on a daily basis, where

immediate feedback is provided. Longer, more formal and analytical

conferences are held at least once a week. As for the content of the

discussions, there’s so much to do at this point that the hustle and bustle of

school life catches up with mentors and STs alike, and conferences

progressively replace their analytical and/or reassuring character with an

almost standard teachers-meeting style, where very definite short-term

goals prevail and the rationale for decision making is not always made

explicit. In this way, immediate problems are dealt with efficiently, so thatone more step can be taken. In these sessions, pro-active counselling



Chapter Ten

mingles with the examination of past events, and the proposals made by

STs interact with those made by tutors.

Tutor visit

The university tutor visits each practicum school at least once during

Practicum II. During the visit, the tutor attends lessons taught by ST and

holds a conference where mentors —content and language—STs and tutor

examine the course of events and discuss problems encountered during the

implementation of the teaching sequence. Although the primary goal of

the conference is to provide feedback to the STs, the analysis of the

transcripts of a selection of these conferences reveals that the officialpurpose of the meeting is often exceeded by the interest of mentors and

tutor in discussing CLIL: its advantages and drawbacks, the fundamental

issues and practical problems that CLIL raises in schools, and the

feasibility or convenience of pedagogical options under discussion. The

transcripts, as the excerpt below illustrates, show the mentors’ awareness

about the relevance of the discussion undertaken and the process of

mentoring as an opportunity for self-development.

Excerpt from a feedback conference during a mentor’s visit April 2008.

MEN = Mentor; TUT = Tutor; Marta = Student-Teacher. XXX =

incomprehensible fragment.

190.

MEN:

(...) el que fa la Marta és que ens

treu del ritme ordinari nostre i ens

fa ser una mica més, millors

docents i canviem la

metodologia (...)

(…) what Marta does is that

she brings us out our regular pace and makes us be a little

bit better teachers and we

change our methodology. (...)

193.

TUT:

per què? Explica’m això. Per què

XXX? (...)

why? Explain this. Why XXX?

(...)196.

MEN:

(...) em sento que m’he de treure

la pols, no? (...) A vegades dic

“no, és que ho de fer millor, jo”,

no? (...) és la mateixa activitat

però jo sé que la puc fer de moltes

maneres o si no la faig tan

dirigida, la faig xxx, la faig més

participativa, canvio (...)

(…)I feel I have to dust myself,

don’t I? Sometimes I say “no, I

have to do it better”, don’t I?

(…) it’s the same activity but I

know that I can do it in many

ways or if I do it less teacher-

centred, I do it XXX, I do it

more participative, I change

(...)



Phase 5. Grasping one’s own development

Back at university, STs devote ten weeks to different assignments.

Among others, the Self-Observation Report 2 (SOR2) Report and the

Practicum Portfolio. There, STs reflect on the work carried out and

document what has been accomplished throughout the course14.

Earlier, we observed that stepping back from problems was difficult

during phase 4 due to the accumulation of urgent tasks. Smith wrote:

“ Reflection requires space in the present and the promise of space in the

future” (1994:150). Phase 5 is the realization of the promise of future time

for reflection; a time where the STs order ideas, read at greater length, and

begin to grasp the nature of the process they have undergone.

The data available for the research come from reports, individual

tutorials and final products. The comparison of products presented earlier

by STs (for example SOR1 compared to SOR2) shows that STs have taken

a major leap forward, gaining in teaching skills and in the way they reflect,

write and talk about teaching and learning ( Escobar Urmeneta, 2009b)15.

When comparing SOR1 and SOR2 STs highlight the usefulness and

complementarily of the assignments:

They were two different steps on the same path. The usefulness of SOR2

would not have been possible without having completed SOR1, and SOR1would not have been so useful if I had not rounded up my research with

SOR (ST’s report, 2008).

Regular mentors-tutors meetings are held regularly during the course.

Table 10-2 summarizes the main TED for CLIL events throughout the

process.

Conclusions

The policies designed by the majority of educational authorities in

highly decentralized Spain demonstrate an enormous effort to generalize

the offer of CLIL programmes in their respective Autonomous

Communities, as is the case of Catalonia. Regardless of this general

concern for the generalization of the CLIL offer, TED for CLIL was not

made explicit in the TED courses designed over the past fifteen years, nor

in the Ministerial Order which regulates the mandatory TED Master

Course starting in September 2009.

Aware that the challenges posed by CLIL are not limited to raisingteachers’ competence levels in foreign languages, The UAB--in

partnership with secondary schools--has developed a TED for CLIL



Chapter Ten

Component through a process of collaborative action-research, which is

integrated into the ordinary TED activities that all STs carry out.

Table 10-2. Summary of main TED for CLIL events.

Phase /

Schedule

Length

in

Weeks

TED for CLIL in-built

activities [Venue]

Mentors and

Tutors joint work

[Venue]

1. October 7 - Preparation for Practicum

I.

- Discussion on video-

taped lessons taught by

unknown teachers.[University]

1. Planning

meeting

[University].

2.November 2 - Self-recording of

teaching practice.

Sequences a-b-c.

[School].

2. Progress

meeting 1.

[University].

3.November

-February

12 - Oral presentation of one

vignette and discussion.

- Self-Observation Report

1 [written].

- Preparation for PracticumII. CLIL unit design.

Visits to schools if

needed.

[University]

3. Progress

meeting 2.

[University].

4.February-

March

7 - Rounding up of CLIL

unit.

- CLIL unit

implementation.

- Self-recording of

teaching practice.Sequences d-e-f.

[School].

4. Tutor visit.

Classroom

observation: Joint

feedback tutorial

(STs, mentors and

tutors).[School].

5.April-

June

10 - Self-Observation report

2.

- Practicum Portfolio

(includes CLIL teaching

sequence).

- Master Dissertation.

[ST’s study; University]

5. Assessment

meeting.

[University]



The central strategy of this Component , which is optional for STs, is

the systematic video recording of STs’ teaching practice, and the use of

the video-recordings selected by the STs themselves as the basis fordiscussion on practical and theoretical issues related to subject-matter

teaching through the means of a foreign language. We do not claim that

this particular option is original in teacher education (see section 3.3.), nor

that it is exclusive of the training CLIL teachers: in our experience non-

CLIL lessons were also recorded and discussed in the vignette presentation

sessions. But the fact is that this particular strategy was selected and

developed precisely in response to the varied and highly demanding

requirements of teaching a subject through a foreign language at a point in

time when basic teaching strategies and standard Pedagogical Content

Knowledge (Shulman, 1987) are not yet developed. Video recording

allows for an integrative approach to the analysis of the problems than the

CLIL ST faces. Access to video-recorded excerpts also allows for

discussion among STs who opted for the CLIL track and those who did

not. These non-CLIL STs are presented with the opportunity of gaining

understanding of the CLIL approach and therefore becoming better

equipped to work in CLIL schools, even if not directly involved in them.

The dynamics generated by the viewing of the vignettes selected by the

STs and the heated discussions over the data available to everyone–CLIL

lessons taught by them–changed the nature of university lessons entirely,

as discussions on how to teach and how learning takes place emerged

without the need for long explanations, complex materials or contrived

activities related to mandatory readings.

The exhaustive monitoring of the process of design and implementation

of the TED for CLIL Component clearly shows that this approach allowed

for the presentation of theoretical issues central to CLIL by demonstrating

in a straightforward manner how the concept presented is relevant for a

teachers’ work. It also allowed for the emergence of stereotypes and

contradictions which could be checked against data, defining areas forfuture observation.

The second pillar of the proposal is the planning and piloting of CLIL

teaching sequences and materials under the supervision of content and

language teaching experts at university and schools. The difficulties

experienced by STs in planning for CLIL lessons evidence the high level

of complexity that this assignment involves. Clearly more work is needed

to develop user-friendly precise guidelines and a safer base structure for

CLIL lesson planning. The specificities and teaching traditions of the

different subjects makes this a knotty task, but a necessary one if CLIL isto succeed in inclusive schools. We intend to endeavour this path in the



Chapter Ten

near future, where the collaboration of content and language teaching

experts will be crucial.

Indeed, getting experts on different fields to talk on one common set ofteaching materials has proved to create a range of potentially rich spaces

for the newcomers, but also for pedagogical improvement and professional

development on the part of those old-timers involved in the discussion. In

all cases, in spite of the important communication gaps among experts on

different disciplines identified in the discussions (Horrillo, forthcoming),

inter-area collaboration encouraged positive interdependence among those

professionals, who learned to learn together (Canet, forthcoming;

Corredera and Ruiz, 2008; Pallarés and Petit, 2009). However, organizing

tandems of students from two different branches in one single school hasnot been implemented due to organizational constraints. Without a doubt,

this has been up to now one of the unsuccessful outcomes of the

experimentation. The generalization in 2009 of the compulsory TED

Master Course and that of the PDS model for practicum schools are likely

to have a positive influence in this regard.

The proposal is also consistent with an empowering approach to

teacher education (Bolin, 1989; Short, 1992), which flees from patronizing

moulds and places teachers at the front of their professional development,

by acknowledging their capacity to identify priorities and goals, select

readings, take risks, experiment with ideas and evaluate the outcomes of

their actions in the current high-stakes school life. The empowering effect

of the TED for CLIL Component has been crowned in a few cases with the

presentation of papers at conferences or with publications in specialized

journals.

This approach also sets a model for continuing self-directed Teacher

Education. Whether it will have a long term effect on the STs future

teaching practice and on their adoption of a reflective approach to self-

directed, life-long teacher education is a matter for subsequent studies.

In this type of model, the teacher-educator role changes from lecturer

or workshop leader to special discussant, facilitator and moderator. In a

way, these lessons needed little preparation from the tutor as STs

involvement in the discussions was guaranteed. On the other hand, the

new role requires good listening skills [understanding where STs want to

go] and an adaptive approach towards problems prioritized by the STs

[helping them to get there and opening new doors and new paths]. Clearly

more focused research is needed on defining successful strategies for

adaptive teacher-educators.

The data also revealed that quality CLIL education is only possibledeparting from learner-centred pedagogical approaches to subject-matter



teaching. It could be reasonably argued that a learner-centred approach is

not exclusive to CLIL. Nonetheless, all successful CLIL-specific

techniques and teaching strategies for inclusive classrooms identified inthe process of experimentation depart from conceptions of classwork far

from the dominant approach to subject-matter teaching consisting of long,

abstract explanations followed by exercises from the coursebook. Indeed,

the CLIL classrooms observed during the experimentation seem to be an

exception to this well documented fact16

. Our interpretation is that the

initiation of a CLIL programme entails for the teacher a significant

alteration in her teaching milieu, which challenges her everyday ways and

makes her reach the crisis point needed to readdress her global approach to

teaching. The effort made by teachers to overcome the communication

constraints set by the use of a foreign language in academic contexts

obliges them to rethink priorities and increase the amount and the quality

of the support that is provided to students (Bazoco et al., 2008; Corredera,

2009; Evnitskaya and Aceros, 2008; Jiménez and Bazoco, 2009; Pallarés

2009; Tàpias, 2009). This finding itself justifies the offer of a TED for

CLIL Component in pre-service TED. It is also clear that teachers, at this

point, need specialised support which is offered in adaptive ways.

To conclude, our work initiated with the objective of designing and

piloting a CLIL Component for pre-service TED, and led us to a model

which, in addition to its initial goal, incorporated the benefits of in-service

teacher education through university-school partnership programmes

based on collaborative research. All members in the learning community

benefited from the process: STs, mentors, tutors, and secondary students.

In this sense, the project managed to satisfy “the necessity for research to

improve the quality of social life in the institutions participating in the

research” (Tobin, 2008: 160).

Since 2005, specialists in English, Mathematics, Science, Social

Sciences and Attention to Diversity in nine different schools took part in

the process of design and experimentation of the Component describedabove. September 2009 supposes the transformation of the previously

optional pre-service TED Master Course into a compulsory one, which

will necessarily bring about a notable increase in the number of students

who enrol in it. One important question will have to be answered in the

near future: whether or not, or to what extent, the generalization of the

model is possible when demand from STs interested in CLIL grows much

larger.

But two things remain clear: without a learner-centred approach to

subject-matter teaching the democratization of CLIL is not viable. Butchange can only be brought about as a result of educational action co-



Chapter Ten

constructed and co-analysed by practitioners –old-timers or newcomers--

teaching and reflecting together.

Notes

1 This action-research programme was conducted within the research projects

2004ARIE00058 and 2005ARIE10056 Avaluació de tasques col•laboratives i

assoliment d'objectius d'aprenentatge en aules AICLE de Ciències en Llengua

Estrangera, and 2006ARIE100011 and 2007ARIE00011 Disseny i experimentació

d'un model de formació del professorat per a aules de semi-immersió en llengua

estrangera, funded by the AGAUR (Generalitat de Catalunya).2 CAP stands for Certificado de Aptitud Pedagógica.

3 These courses were regulated by the Organic Law 1/1990, and the Royal Decree118/2004.4 The original term is Didàctica Específica. In many European languages term

Didàctica or its equivalent translations are used to refer to professional knowledge

on teaching and learning specific school subjects.5 In this particular research, the schools in the CLIL-SI (http://www.clil-si.org)

collaborative team acted de facto as PDS. Nevertheless, Practicum schools only

gained this official status in 2009 after the Order EDU/122/2009, published in

DOGC 5347.6 When the process of interpretation of this natural data was inconclusive,

clarification of specific points was sought by means of semi-structured interviewswith specific informants.7 Over the past three years, this modus operandi has allowed us to sketch out the

target profile for a CLIL teacher, to identify priorities in a pre-service TED course,

to develop TED tasks, instruments and materials and to add, suppress or

reformulate demands placed on STs through the course.8 The traditional Spanish pre-service teacher education system, with its exclusive

focus on content-matter specialization and its disregard for professional training,

may well explain this impermeability.9 Advanced competences in the subject-matter and the foreign language are

considered a pre-requisite to enter the CLIL track, and therefore are taken forgranted here.10 Duffy’s (1998) Adaptive Approach to Teaching calls for a shift from technical to

adaptive expertise, or ability to modify and adjust instructional techniques in order

to meet the needs of diverse students.11 The official bilingual status of Catalonia accounts for the high levels of

sensitivity towards language in education.12 On one occasion a ST expressed her frustration because the students didn’t pay

much attention to her while she was explaining ancient cultures using carefully

selected diagrams and other visual aids. Due to the lay-out of the classroom, 50%

of the students couldn’t see the visuals, nor establish eye-contact with the teacher.The camera could, so nobody had noticed [Tutorial session, 2008].13 IRF stands for Initiation, Response, Feedback (Sincalir and Coulthard 1975).



14 In this period, STs also develop a small-scale piece of research, the Master

Dissertation, which focuses on one particular issue in their teaching practice.15 On the other hand, the empirical data available has contributed to the

reconstruction of the individual paths of two STs. The examination of these datahas been tackled through case studies (Escobar 2009; Escobar, Evnitskaya, and

Horrillo, 2009).16Conversely the reports from STs rarely, if at all, make explicit mention of the

CLIL circumstances in their accounts, if not directly questioned on the matter.

Works Cited

Allen, D. and Ryan, K. (1969) Microteaching. Reading, MA: Addison-

Wesley.Anton, M. and Oller, M. (eds.) (2007) El pràcticum: present i futur a

reflexió. Servei Publicacions UAB.

Bazoco, J., Eixarch, E., Jiménez, M. and Mas, M. (2008) Arquimedes’

principle...apte per a tots els públics? Paper presented at the 2nd

International Conference of the EdiLic Association Barcelona, 2-4 July

2008.

Bolin, F. (1989) Empowering leadership. Teachers College Record, 91(1),

81-96.

Breen, M.P. (1987a) Contemporary Paradigms in Syllabus Design. Part I. Language Teaching 20(2), 81-92.

—. (1987b) Contemporary Paradigms in Syllabus Design. Part II.

Language Teaching 20(3), 158-174.

Canet, R. (Forthcoming) Rethink, Rewrite, Remake. Repensar què i com

ensenyar ciències a partir d’una experiència AICLE a Barcelona. In C.

Escobar et al. (eds.). Educació Plurilingüe: Experiències, Research &

Politiques. Bellaterra, ICE-UAB.

Carr, W. and Kemmis, S. (1986) Becoming critical: education knowledge

and action research. London: Falmer Press.Corredera, A. (2009) Experiencia AICLE (música en inglés) en el aula

inclusiva de secundaria: Evolución de la percepción del profesor de

contenido. In C.M. Bretones Calljeas et al. (eds.). Applied Linguistics

Now: Understanding Language and Mind : 345-359.

Corredera, A. and Ruiz, B.J. (2008) Aula AICLE (música en anglès) a

l’aula inclusiva de secundària. Paper presented at the II Trobada de

Semi-immersió a Catalunya:la col•laboració entre dos experts a l’aula

de SemiImmersió. Bellaterra 2008.

Duffy, G. (1998) Teaching and the balancing of round stones. Phi Delta

Kappan 79(10), 777- 80.



Chapter Ten

Edwards, G., Tsui, A.B.M., and Stimpson, P. (2009) School-University

Partnership and Theories of Learning. In G. Edwards, A.B.M. Tsui,

and F. Lopez-Real (eds.) Learning in School-University Partnership.Sociocultural Perspectives. New York. Routledge.

Elliot, J. (1991) Action Research for Educational Change, Buckingham:

Open University Press.

Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y.S. (1989) Fourth generation evaluation.

Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Escobar Urmeneta, C. (2009) Cuando la lengua de la escuela es diferente

de la lengua familiar. In Cuadernos de Pedagogia 395: 47-50.

—. (2009b) Learning to Learn to Become an English Teacher: Teaching,

Reflecting and Understanding. Which is Which? Paper presented at the16th International Conference on Learning. Barcelona July 2009.

Escobar Urmeneta, C., Evnitskaya, N., Horrillo Godino, Z. (2009) A Case

of Expert-Novice Conversational Reflection During an Initial

Education Practicum on the CLIL Approach. Paper presented at the

TRI-CLIL International Round Table. Bellaterra, May 2009.

Esteve, O. and Carandell, Z. (2009) La formació permanent del

professorat des de la pràctica reflexiva. In Articles de Didàctica de la

Llengua i de la Literatura, 49: 47-62.

Evnitskaya, N. and J.C. Aceros (2008) "We are a good team": el contrato

didáctico en parejas de aprendices de lengua extranjera. Revista

Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 21: 45-70.

González, P., Llobet, L., Masats, D., Nussbaum, L. and Unamuno, V.

(2008) Tres en uno: inclusión de alumnado diverso, integración de

contenidos y formación de profesorado. In J. L. Barrio (ed.) El proceso

de enseñar lenguas (pp. 107-133). Madrid. La Muralla.

Greenwalt, K. (2008) Through the camera's eye: A phenomenological

analysis of teacher subjectivity. Teaching and Teacher Education

24(2), 387-399.

Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., et al. (2001) Toward a theory of teacher

community. Teachers College Record , 103(6), 942-1012.

Guba, E. and Lincoln, Y. S. (1989) Fourth generation evaluation.

Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

Horrillo Godino, Z. (forthcoming) Teacher Education on the CLIL

Approach: a Case of Informed Appreciations of Complementary

Curricular Areas. In C. Escobar et al. (eds.). Educació Plurilingüe:

Experiències, Research & Politiques. Bellaterra, ICE-UAB.

Jiménez, M. and Bazoco, J. (2009) Ciencias en inglés con un enfoque

inclusivo. Cuadernos de Pedagogia 395: 70-72.



Kolb, D. A. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of

learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.

Korthagen, F. A. (2001) Linking Practice and Theory. The Pedagogy ofRealistic Teacher Education. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lasagabaster, D. and Sierra, J. M. (eds.) (2004) La observación como

instrumento para la mejora de la enseñanza-aprendizaje de lenguas.

Barcelona. Horsori.

Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in Practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in

everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral

participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Milian, M. and Ribas,T. (2009) Les pràctiques als centres educatius en la

formació del futur professorat de llengua. Articles de Didàctica de la

Llengua i de la Literatura, 49, 63-81.

Murphy, P. (ed.) (1999) Learners, Learning and Assessment . London:

Paul Chapman.

Nussbaum, L (2008) Construire le plurilinguisme à l’école: de la recherche

à l’intervention et de l’intervention à la recherche. In M. Candelier et

al. (eds.) Conscience du plurilinguisme (pp. 125-144). Rennes: Rennes

Presses Universitaires.

Pallarés, O. (2009) Activitats de “Think and Discuss”. La bastida per a la

construcció i la comunicació del coneixement matemàtic a l’aula

AICLE . Paper presented at the TRI-CLIL International Round Table.

Bellaterra, May 2009.

Pallarés, O. and Carlota Petit, C. (2009) Matemáticas e inglés, un tándem

con objetivos comunes. Cuadernos de Pedagogia 395: 66-69.

Pérez-Vidal, C. (2001) Multilingual Education: Problems and solutions in

Catalonia. In P. Van de Craen and C. Pérez-Vidal (eds.) The

Multilingual Challenge (pp. 31-57). Barcelona: European Commission-

Pompeu Fabra University.

Perrenoud, P. (2004) Diez nuevas competencies para enseñar. Barcelona:Graó.

Rogoff, B. (1990) Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in

social context. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sanmartí, N. (2007) El practicum dels futurs mestres: una oportunitat per

interrelacionar la formació inicial, la formació permanent i la recerca,

In Anton, M.; Oller, M. (eds.) El pràcticum: present i futur a reflexió

(pp. 115-121). Barcelona: Servei Publicacions UAB.

Schön, D. A. (1983) The reflective practitioner: How professionals think

in action. New York: Basic Books.



Chapter Ten

—. (1987) Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for

teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Short, P. M. (1992) Dimensions of teacher empowerment . PennsylvaniaState University, Program in Educational Administration.

Shulman, L. S. (1987) Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new

reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.

Sincalir, J. McH. and Coulthard, M. (1975) Towards an analysis of

discourse. London: Oxford University Press.

Smith, M. K. (1994) Local Education, Buckingham: Open University

Press.

Strickland, D. S. (1988) The teacher as researcher: toward the extended

professional. Language Arts 65, 754-64.Tàpias, N. (2009) Becoming Reporters in a CLIL Classroom:

Development of Shared Understanding of Task Requirement in Group

Work . Paper presented at the International Round Table TRI-CLIL.

Bellaterra, May 2009.

Tobin, K. (2008) Repetition, difference and rising up with research in

education. In K. Ercikan and W.-M. Roth (eds.). Generalizing from

educational research: Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative

Polarization (pp. 149-172). New York. Routledge.

Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in Society Cambridge, MA: Harvard University

Press.